4.0 but 60 PCAT?? how is this possible?

[RX student]

How do people who have a 3.9 or 4.0 make a very low PCAT score (50's or 60's)?? Because, in my opinion, the PCAT was just like a final exam... It covered everything I've done in my pre-pharm coursework. Does this make sense?? I don't mean to sound rude, but are people not learning the material and just getting by on the class tests? That is why I think the PCAT is a good tool b/c it really shows how much a person retains. Does anyone agree with this? Or am I about to get "blessed out" for this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[evilolive]

A number of reasons that I believe to be true:
1) Some people don't test well and never will - especially when it's a broad examination.
2) The classes they took were at a - but not exclusively limited to - community college and were exceptionally easy. If you get an A at some random community college, it won't give nearly anywhere the indicator of academic rigor the way a B at an ivy league college would. You may outperform your peers on the bell curve, but this doesn't necessarily guarantee that the 'best' of this sampling would be able to compete with other more qualified candidates. This is not to say that CCs are bad (there are plenty of CCs that probably DO give better educational quality than a few state schools, but they are rather an exception to the rule), but it's a reality that on average the quality of students in that environment are of lower caliber.
3) People don't retain information for long periods of time. This can be coupled with 2) as the courses that don't stress you won't teach you the material necessary to take the exam. The PCAT is not difficult because it does not testing critical thinking; it is mostly a memorization/recall assessment.
4) Bad test day. Sometimes you don't get enough sleep or something happens and you screw up. **** happens. I myself got woken up in the middle of my slumber the night before the PCAT and went in with only 5 hours of broken sleep.
5) People don't necessarily know how to study for the exams.

While this may seem like a cruel and pessimistic analysis, I do believe each one of my ideas has its own merits. It's not a fair world, and some people are more capable than others. The PCAT is but one indicator of readiness for pharmacy, and those who can jump through the hoops will be better off in becoming a pharmacist. On the other hand, testing well on the PCAT won't guarantee competency as a good pharmacist, but it's better than no set bar at all. That's why the PCAT isn't the only determining factor in admissions. Just my two cents.

 

[acetyl]

A number of reasons that I believe to be true:
1) Some people don't test well and never will - especially when it's a broad examination.
2) The classes they took were at a - but not exclusively limited to - community college and were exceptionally easy. If you get an A at some random community college, it won't give nearly anywhere the indicator of academic rigor the way a B at an ivy league college would. You may outperform your peers on the bell curve, but this doesn't necessarily guarantee that the 'best' of this sampling would be able to compete with other more qualified candidates. This is not to say that CCs are bad (there are plenty of CCs that probably DO give better educational quality than a few state schools, but they are rather an exception to the rule), but it's a reality that on average the quality of students in that environment are of lower caliber.
3) People don't retain information for long periods of time. This can be coupled with 2) as the courses that don't stress you won't teach you the material necessary to take the exam. The PCAT is not difficult because it does not testing critical thinking; it is mostly a memorization/recall assessment.
4) Bad test day. Sometimes you don't get enough sleep or something happens and you screw up. **** happens. I myself got woken up in the middle of my slumber the night before the PCAT and went in with only 5 hours of broken sleep.
5) People don't necessarily know how to study for the exams.

While this may seem like a cruel and pessimistic analysis, I do believe each one of my ideas has its own merits. It's not a fair world, and some people are more capable than others. The PCAT is but one indicator of readiness for pharmacy, and those who can jump through the hoops will be better off in becoming a pharmacist. On the other hand, testing well on the PCAT won't guarantee competency as a good pharmacist, but it's better than no set bar at all. That's why the PCAT isn't the only determining factor in admissions. Just my two cents.

I agree

 

[Ray1234]

If ppl with 2.9 gpa can come up with 90 percentile in pcat and are able to be a competent and confident pharmacist then we should not doubt the ability of ppl with 4.0 gpa and 50 percentile on pcat?
my two cents as well.

 

[abt04]

hey.. let's remember that the overall score is based on the average of both science and english scores.. so if you are a whiz on the science but did poorly on the reading or vocab (which is possible cuz some people arent good at verbal testing due to not getting it, or the schools we go to dont focus on the importance of reading comprehension), then it just happens you get a 50 or something. or if you happen to do poorly on the sciences but what saves you is the english scoring. so there are always gonna be pros and cons to an entrance exam. but i agree with others saying that its better to have something of a bar than none at all, and that its only one of the factors of getting into a pharmacy school

some got it going for them and some are just struggling to get by.

RX- you are not gonna get "blessed out" for ur opinion, but the idea im trying to express is like, why do colleges take high school students with a 1000 out of 1600 SATs( im old so i dont know the new scoring) and reject the ones with 1500. but dont worry about the pcat, what will set apart the good pharmacists from the not so great is the NAPLEX.

 

[KellyBean]

hey.. let's remember that the overall score is based on the average of both science and english scores.. so if you are a whiz on the science but did poorly on the reading or vocab (which is possible cuz some people arent good at verbal testing due to not getting it, or the schools we go to dont focus on the importance of reading comprehension), then it just happens you get a 50 or something. or if you happen to do poorly on the sciences but what saves you is the english scoring. so there are always gonna be pros and cons to an entrance exam. but i agree with others saying that its better to have something of a bar than none at all, and that its only one of the factors of getting into a pharmacy school

some got it going for them and some are just struggling to get by.

RX- you are not gonna get "blessed out" for ur opinion, but the idea im trying to express is like, why do colleges take high school students with a 1000 out of 1600 SATs( im old so i dont know the new scoring) and reject the ones with 1500. but dont worry about the pcat, what will set apart the good pharmacists from the not so great is the NAPLEX.

Well said!!! My composite was 59%, but I did rather well in my math and chemistry sections (above 90%). Some people just don't do well in the verbal and reading sections since ENGLISH AIN'T THEIR FIRST LANGUAGE..lol..

 

[sdn1977]

hey.. let's remember that the overall score is based on the average of both science and english scores.. so if you are a whiz on the science but did poorly on the reading or vocab (which is possible cuz some people arent good at verbal testing due to not getting it, or the schools we go to dont focus on the importance of reading comprehension), then it just happens you get a 50 or something. or if you happen to do poorly on the sciences but what saves you is the english scoring. so there are always gonna be pros and cons to an entrance exam. but i agree with others saying that its better to have something of a bar than none at all, and that its only one of the factors of getting into a pharmacy school

some got it going for them and some are just struggling to get by.

RX- you are not gonna get "blessed out" for ur opinion, but the idea im trying to express is like, why do colleges take high school students with a 1000 out of 1600 SATs( im old so i dont know the new scoring) and reject the ones with 1500. but dont worry about the pcat, what will set apart the good pharmacists from the not so great is the NAPLEX.

The fallacy here is - no one cares about the NAPLEX score! Either you passed or didn't pass. Nobody cares when you apply for a job.

I never even took the NAPLEX nor did 90% of the pharmacists in CA!

What sets good apart from not so good is what you do with your knowledge - not what you score on an exam.

However, you do have to jump thru hoops to get into school & this, in some places, is just one of them.

 

[InsiderSJFC]

As an administrator who has worked at three schools of pharmacy in my career, I am saddened by the continued emphasis put on obtaining high PCAT scores. I try to look at the PCAT score last, preferably after the interview if I am doing the interview. I know that students with PCATs that do not predict success in pharmacy school will generally not be invited to interview, unless such candidates have been identified as having a disadvantaged background or other extenuating circumstances. In the interview, I want to know the person, not the numbers. I do not want an PCAT in the upper 90's to create an undeserved halo effect during the interview. Nor do I want an PCAT below 70 to cast an undeserved shadow over a talented future pharmacist. It is so refreshing to be working T n institution which has this same philosophy.

 

[butadione]

ill tell you why straight up - you probably go to an easy school.

 

[Julianne]

How do people who have a 3.9 or 4.0 make a very low PCAT score (50's or 60's)?? Because, in my opinion, the PCAT was just like a final exam... It covered everything I've done in my pre-pharm coursework. Does this make sense?? I don't mean to sound rude, but are people not learning the material and just getting by on the class tests? That is why I think the PCAT is a good tool b/c it really shows how much a person retains. Does anyone agree with this? Or am I about to get "blessed out" for this?

There have already been some really good posts about this, but here's another angle to consider:


I took the PCAT the fall of my first year in school. At that time, I had been out of high school for <GASP> 11 years and had only completed one full semester of college coursework (Psychology, Ethics, Inorganic I and II) before taking the exam. My original intent was to simply get a feel for how the test was structured in order to better prepare for the "real" thing... however, since I was accepted with my first-try score (75/4.0 GPA), I chose not to take it again. While my situation may not be the norm, I'm sure that there are many people who take the exam before completing all of their prereqs which could account for the discrepancy between their GPA and PCAT score(s).

 

[sleazye]

Here's how: someone who didn't study, has not had all the courses covered on the test (Calc, Orgo) and english isn't their first language.

 

[howsoonisnow]

I took the PCAT prior to starting OChem or Anatomy & Physiology. I got in the 60s in Chemistry and 87 composite. I am rather certain that if I retook the test now, I would score in the 90s. I just didn't have the background when I took the test.

I took all of my prerequisites at a community college. I interviewed well and was accepted to pharmacy school. My GPA, 3.94.

What I resent, is hearing that I have a high GPA because community colleges are "easier" than Ivy League schools. Studies show that Ivy League professors are not always more credentialed than those in community colleges. In fact, 3/4 of my profs teach full time at Universities and part time at community college. Do you think they are teaching a different level of education to me because I attend community college?

I really doubt any students in a University setting could take OChem from my professor and tell me it isn't challenging.

I don't mean to rant, it's just frustrating to me that people actually believe that bull. Bottom line, I will be a PharmD in 2010, and a damn good one I guarantee.

 

[evilolive]

What I resent, is hearing that I have a high GPA because community colleges are "easier" than Ivy League schools. Studies show that Ivy League professors are not always more credentialed than those in community colleges. In fact, 3/4 of my profs teach full time at Universities and part time at community college. Do you think they are teaching a different level of education to me because I attend community college?

I really doubt any students in a University setting could take OChem from my professor and tell me it isn't challenging.

I don't mean to rant, it's just frustrating to me that people actually believe that bull. Bottom line, I will be a PharmD in 2010, and a damn good one I guarantee.

It's not to say that the material isn't challenging; orgo is orgo wherever you take it. However, community college classes are limited by the baseline class capability of your peers. And yes, I am telling you that professors probably do teach differently compared to a university setting. Student quality will be lower, and thus there is less that a professor can reasonably do to challenge his students. In an ivy league setting where students are of the top 1% of the US, is it not reasonable to assume that the standards bar will rise significantly in order to separate students' capability at this new level? It is also not to say that CC professors are less accomplished (though you only need a masters to teach, not a PhD) as I have never stated that anywhere in my initial response - I was just pointing out the difference between environments and the schooling. Wishful thinking of an egalitarian society against elitist notions produce this conflict - but the other side of the argument is not to be ignored. Smart people do come out of CCs, and no one is attacking that fact. I am just trying to express my own opinion towards this particular undue reverence - there are limitations to the system.

While this is outside of the confines of the argument, there is an interesting question to propose. Pharmacy admissions is acknowledged to be less rigorous than medical school, though the professions are equally important. Why is there discrimination against CCs among the medical school gatekeepers? This also leads to the following question: why is the MCAT significantly more difficult than the PCAT?

 

[penguins429]

I took the PCAT prior to starting OChem or Anatomy & Physiology. I got in the 60s in Chemistry and 87 composite. I am rather certain that if I retook the test now, I would score in the 90s. I just didn't have the background when I took the test.

I took all of my prerequisites at a community college. I interviewed well and was accepted to pharmacy school. My GPA, 3.94.

What I resent, is hearing that I have a high GPA because community colleges are "easier" than Ivy League schools. Studies show that Ivy League professors are not always more credentialed than those in community colleges. In fact, 3/4 of my profs teach full time at Universities and part time at community college. Do you think they are teaching a different level of education to me because I attend community college?

I really doubt any students in a University setting could take OChem from my professor and tell me it isn't challenging.

I don't mean to rant, it's just frustrating to me that people actually believe that bull. Bottom line, I will be a PharmD in 2010, and a damn good one I guarantee.

I think what someone gets out of an education depends almost entirely on what they want to get out of it ... in my experience, the one community college prereq class that I took (anatomy and physiology I) was by far, easier than any other class that I took at my 4-year university ...
I learned a lot from that one CC class-because I wanted to-but I know a lot of other students who took away very little from that class, and still managed to get an A
... all in all, I believe that you can go to a CC and learn more than a student at a 4-year University; however, I also believe you can go to a CC, get a higher GPA than a student at a 4-year university, and learn a lot less ... it all depends what you choose to do with your education ....

 

[abt04]

The fallacy here is - no one cares about the NAPLEX score! Either you passed or didn't pass. Nobody cares when you apply for a job.

I never even took the NAPLEX nor did 90% of the pharmacists in CA!

What sets good apart from not so good is what you do with your knowledge - not what you score on an exam.

However, you do have to jump thru hoops to get into school & this, in some places, is just one of them.

true.. i guess im just trying to get people to look pass the pcats is all.

 

[howsoonisnow]

It's not to say that the material isn't challenging; orgo is orgo wherever you take it. However, community college classes are limited by the baseline class capability of your peers. And yes, I am telling you that professors probably do teach differently compared to a university setting. Student quality will be lower, and thus there is less that a professor can reasonably do to challenge his students. In an ivy league setting where students are of the top 1% of the US, is it not reasonable to assume that the standards bar will rise significantly in order to separate students' capability at this new level? It is also not to say that CC professors are less accomplished (though you only need a masters to teach, not a PhD) as I have never stated that anywhere in my initial response - I was just pointing out the difference between environments and the schooling. Wishful thinking of an egalitarian society against elitist notions produce this conflict - but the other side of the argument is not to be ignored. Smart people do come out of CCs, and no one is attacking that fact. I am just trying to express my own opinion towards this particular undue reverence - there are limitations to the system.

While this is outside of the confines of the argument, there is an interesting question to propose. Pharmacy admissions is acknowledged to be less rigorous than medical school, though the professions are equally important. Why is there discrimination against CCs among the medical school gatekeepers? This also leads to the following question: why is the MCAT significantly more difficult than the PCAT?

I appreciate your response, however not everyone is given the same opportunity in our society.
No, not every cc student takes education seriously, and probably only a select few are actually concerned with the knowledge gleaned from their time in the classroom.

I can tell you that at the cc I attend approximately 200 students were enrolled in general chemistry. Second semester that stat dropped considerably. First semester OChem, 25 enrolled. (I emphasize enrolled) Second semester OChem, 12 remain. My point is while yes, anyone with a few hundred dollars can attend cc, very few have the aptitude to handle OChem which, incidentally, is considered the weed out class for Pharmacy and Med School. I'll take OChem at any Ivy League you desire and I guarantee I'll hold my own and my GPA will not suffer.

As for undue reverence, I don't think anyone is asking to be revered. I am certainly not- least of all by my peers. Yes, I consider anyone in a prepharmacy curriculum no matter the setting to be a peer. All I ask is that we all, as peers, respect one another's accomplishments.

Regarding the dichotomy between Pharmacy and Med School admission, most of the physicians I have encountered stress the importance of the MCAT score. I have never known a pharmacist to place such importance on the PCAT. If the PCAT were that important and my first score was 87, I would have retaken after my prereqs were completed to boost my score. Med School was never a consideration for me, however I know several physicians who went to cc for portions of their premed.

 

[tashka]

I took all my prerequisites in the community college too, and observed the same trend. About 28 people were in Organic I, now just 12 left. Community college classes are not easy, and not a cakewalk. I did not notice any of my professors trying to lighten the load because students are not getting it. The class have to move forward, and those who do not get it have to address it somehow and solve their problems or to drop out.
It is important to understand that community colleges serve a certain purpose. It is not feasible for everybody to enroll in university. Some people (I am one of them) already have advanced degrees. Others just plain don't have money, or have other responsibilities in life. If I would be just out of high school, of course I would go to university. But it is not feasible at this point of my life. What I also enjoy about CC is that faculty is very accessible and eager to help with any questions or problems. And classes are small too.
I believe, it is possible to have very high GPA and low PCAT. Many important reasons were correctly stated above, but I also think speed of the test is a big factor. It is stressful. And not everyone can think and reply this fast, some people just need time to think, and there is nothing wrong with that. It was very hard for me to write coherent , meaningful essay in just 30 min, though I usually write great essays.

 

[chem123]

i agree...CC is not easier...and the PCAT is soo general and has soo much information...just that fact alone makes the test complicated and stressful (meaning you might forget all the information you ever knew just because ur nerves have taken over)...my gpa is pretty good...but everytime i take a pcat practice test... i do HORRIBLE....which is making me doubt myself....how can u get a 90??.....either you people have great memory (i dont)...or you study pretty hard...
does any1 have advice on studying for that test?? what do u study..what boooks, how long do u study for???......

 

[dgroulx]

I took anatomy & physiology at community college. I found them extremely easy compared to my 4-year school, but 50% of the class dropped out. We didn't have that sort of attrition at the 4-year school. I agree with the poster who said that the caliber of students is better. You get a lot of students at CC wanting to go into health care. Not all of them are smart enough to make it.

The PCAT is needed so you can rank candidates. For students that don't test well, how do they expect to get through pharmacy school? UF found a correlation between PCAT scores and their attrition rate. That's why they weight it so highly.

It's possible for someone to have a 4.0 and do poorly on the PCAT. A student can cram and memorize for an exam. There is a set amount of material. The PCAT covers too much and you don't know exactly what will be on the test. It is a good test to see how much you retained. That skill will be needed in pharmacy school.

 

[Rxbound]

To emphasize what Dana said...the NAPLEX is going to test you over the material you learn throughout pharmacy school. You should know the material in such a way that you don't have to re-learn everything.

 

[Rxpotency]

How do people who have a 3.9 or 4.0 make a very low PCAT score (50's or 60's)?? Because, in my opinion, the PCAT was just like a final exam... It covered everything I've done in my pre-pharm coursework. Does this make sense?? I don't mean to sound rude, but are people not learning the material and just getting by on the class tests? That is why I think the PCAT is a good tool b/c it really shows how much a person retains. Does anyone agree with this? Or am I about to get "blessed out" for this?

Well I give more weight to the PCAT because I know not all schools are created equal. I did well on the PCAT (composite of 90, scored over 95 on the chem and bio sections). My GPA is between 3.0-3.5. However, because u got a 4.0 it doesn't mean you should get a 90. It also doesn't mean the courses or school you attend was very rigorous. Some schools are easier than others. Some schools curve scores and make you compete against others that lowers GPAs although you may be very bright. In my opinion the PCAT is more accurate for a general body of knowledge in a specific area. It's standardized so it compares you with people within those specific topics on what they know and what they don't. Some people are better at test taking on those particular topics than others and thats the point of the test. It is the formal way of measuring what you know in a particular area at that time compared to others. GPA just measure how well you do over a longer period of time. The difficulty of GPA's could vary depending on the topics covered and instructor. GPA and PCAT are two very different things.


​

 

[suntzu]

I agree with a lot of what has already been said. I got my biochem degree at a university almost [*gasp*] 10 years ago. The competition was very intense in every class. When a professor has a mob of rabid premed students competing for those grades, some degree of scaling has to occur. The hard science departments especially looked down on 'too many' 4.0's in a given class. I've poured blood, sweat, piss, and tears into several classes in which I didn't even break a 3.0.

Now community college. . .It's been a new experience for me. I've danced around a few in the area, collecting a few prereqs, and have seen one common denominator: It all depends on the teacher. I had a stats teacher [with only a masters] who ran me through a meat grinder last summer. The next quarter at the same college I had a teacher who had no business teaching. With all due generosity, the guy was dumb. He couldn't teach his way out of a wet paper bag, and I almost feel stupider having taken his course. I know at least half of the class got 4.0's. I never saw such disparity at the university level. Certainly there is variation in class quality, but CC is nothing short of a crapshoot, IME. As someone already said, the PCAT and GPA are two very different things.

The PCAT is a normalizer, just an indicator of your ability to prepare for and take a standardized test. Stress is a part of pharmacy, and being fast and meticulous under pressure is important. Does it mean much more than that? I really don't think so. No matter how crappy or easy your coursework was, you can *prepare* for the PCAT. The Kaplan Guide, practice tests, etc. are widely available and tell you what you need to know [for the most part]. The last time I took ochem was '94, math in '93 [except that stats class last summer]. So I knew had to review like crazy, and put in a lot of work over the summer which really paid off. I felt like a third grader with a crayon in my left hand writing the essay, but only because I didn't practice much.

I think the PCAT is important, both to demonstrate your general knowledge across many disciplines and your ability to work fast and accurately under pressure. Everyone takes the same thing essentially, so it is a relatively good, albeit crude measuring stick. Remember that it's only one factor, though. My grades and test scores are very good, but I'd kill to have more than the 10 hours of pharmacy experience I've managed to accumulate

 

[srock]

GPA is overrated. In most industries, especially tech and science, they don't care about GPA once you have a few years in the work force. Maybe the PCAT scores are more indicative that this person does poorly on standardized tests or didn't take it as seriously as a class. Either way, these scores only get you in the door, then what you do is all that matters.

Kaplan may be a good option for the next PCAT test.

 

[evilolive]

I really don't think pharmacy experience is crucial. Passion and research about the field should be enough, especially in the interviews if you are able to convey your desire to enter this new profession.

 

[sakigt]

It's not to say that the material isn't challenging; orgo is orgo wherever you take it. However, community college classes are limited by the baseline class capability of your peers. And yes, I am telling you that professors probably do teach differently compared to a university setting. Student quality will be lower, and thus there is less that a professor can reasonably do to challenge his students. In an ivy league setting where students are of the top 1% of the US, is it not reasonable to assume that the standards bar will rise significantly in order to separate students' capability at this new level? It is also not to say that CC professors are less accomplished (though you only need a masters to teach, not a PhD) as I have never stated that anywhere in my initial response - I was just pointing out the difference between environments and the schooling. Wishful thinking of an egalitarian society against elitist notions produce this conflict - but the other side of the argument is not to be ignored. Smart people do come out of CCs, and no one is attacking that fact. I am just trying to express my own opinion towards this particular undue reverence - there are limitations to the system.

While this is outside of the confines of the argument, there is an interesting question to propose. Pharmacy admissions is acknowledged to be less rigorous than medical school, though the professions are equally important. Why is there discrimination against CCs among the medical school gatekeepers? This also leads to the following question: why is the MCAT significantly more difficult than the PCAT?

Ive done both 4-year and CC Science courses and neither are to be taken lightly. If anything I feel as if my CC teachers have something to prove and were not going to get away with the learning less because this is "just CC."

In any case, Im 23 with a mortgage working FT and taking classes PT. When I can find evening classes at 4 year colleges that also have evening labs Ill consider them. Until then, Im a proud CC student.

 

[evilolive]

In any case, Im 23 with a mortgage working FT and taking classes PT. When I can find evening classes at 4 year colleges that also have evening labs Ill consider them. Until then, Im a proud CC student.

My college has 'em all the time

 

[soccerfreak]

I went to a CC for 3 years and did all of my prerequesites there. I graduated with an AS and a 3.7 GPA, I took the PCAT and scored a 63 composite. I was accepted to pharmacy school and for some strange reason............I have a GPA of 3.82 and that's well above the majority of students in my class who came out of a university.

 

[OasisDwlr]

What does everyone think about the CA schools not requiring the PCAT? I think that most people would agree that the CA pharm schools are good schools, so why do you think they don't require the PCAT?

 

[Swanchick84]

This is just a guess. I'm thinking that CA schools don't require the PCAT b/c they approve the quality of education of CA colleges-UC's, Cal States and privates. The majority of those attending CA schools are from CA anyways. Again..that's totally a guess.

 

[collegegirl247]

I did very well on my pcat for the gpa that I have. I am hoping that this will help me out a little bit. I wonder what pharmacy schools think of students that have gpa's and pcat scores that don't "match". Meaning a low gpa but high pcat, or vice versa...what do you think???

 

[omnione]

I did very well on my pcat for the gpa that I have. I am hoping that this will help me out a little bit. I wonder what pharmacy schools think of students that have gpa's and pcat scores that don't "match". Meaning a low gpa but high pcat, or vice versa...what do you think???

For the low GPA and high PCAT scenario, I once heard an admissions board member say that he would interpret that as a student being a rigorous curriculum. Looking back on that comment coupled with my current stats (94 PCAT, 3.45 GPA), that comment doesn't apply to me. For my case, I overextended and had too many responsibilities. These were great responsibilities to have, but it caused a tradeoff where I lost time and added stress.

 

[taken2]

I honestly don't think PCAT is a good test of how smart you are or whether you took classes at a CC or a 4 yrs college.
I know a guy in my class with 86 PCAT but he failed all three major classes we took last semester and is currently on one year suspension. Then there is this other girl in my class that made 66 on the PCAT. she won the best student in our pharmaceutics class during summer academy and has been leading almost the whole class in all the classes.
so for some students that english is not their first language or that did not grow up here, they do poorly on the verbal and reading comprehension sections which affect their composite score.

 

[Trackster]

I totally agree with you, Taken2. I am in that position right now, not from the states, currently in undergrad with science and non-science GPA of 3.8. You don't want to know my PCAT score (really bad PCAT cos of verbal and comprehension).

I took PCAT again to better my chances and hopefully get in to the only school that i applied to.

 

[neopentane]

I totally agree with you, Taken2. I am in that position right now, not from the states, currently in undergrad with science and non-science GPA of 3.8. You don't want to know my PCAT score (really bad PCAT cos of verbal and comprehension).

I took PCAT again to better my chances and hopefully get in to the only school that i applied to.

same here....66 pcat w/ 3.98 gpa + a degree

 

[neopentane]

I went to a CC for 3 years and did all of my prerequesites there. I graduated with an AS and a 3.7 GPA, I took the PCAT and scored a 63 composite. I was accepted to pharmacy school and for some strange reason............I have a GPA of 3.82 and that's well above the majority of students in my class who came out of a university.

wow! which school.....did u have any pharm exp? when did u apply?

 

[soccerfreak]

Midwestern in Downer's Grove. I had no pharmacy tech experience but a lot of community service and some outsdanding LORs. It seems to me that a lot of the students that went to a university are too laid back. Whenever you go to a CC you go for some reason, whether it is money, time, family etc. but most of the students that go there want to learn and they put in a lot more work than university students to reach that goal that they set out for themselves.

 

[ARx1]

As an administrator who has worked at three schools of pharmacy in my career, I am saddened by the continued emphasis put on obtaining high PCAT scores. I try to look at the PCAT score last, preferably after the interview if I am doing the interview. I know that students with PCATs that do not predict success in pharmacy school will generally not be invited to interview, unless such candidates have been identified as having a disadvantaged background or other extenuating circumstances. In the interview, I want to know the person, not the numbers. I do not want an PCAT in the upper 90's to create an undeserved halo effect during the interview. Nor do I want an PCAT below 70 to cast an undeserved shadow over a talented future pharmacist. It is so refreshing to be working T n institution which has this same philosophy.

Where do you work? That's where I need to be applying.

 

[KellyBean]

Where do you work? That's where I need to be applying.

He works for Saint John's Fisher College (NY)

 

[WVUPharm2007]

test well and never will - especially when it's a broad examination.
2) The classes they took were at a - but not exclusively limited to - community college and were exceptionally easy. If you get an A at some random community college, it won't give nearly anywhere the indicator of academic rigor the way a B at an ivy league college would. You may outperform your peers on the bell curve, but this doesn't necessarily guarantee that the 'best' of this sampling would be able to compete with other more qualified candidates. This is not to say that CCs are bad (there are plenty of CCs that probably DO give better educational quality than a few state schools, but they are rather an exception to the rule), but it's a reality that on average the quality of students in that environment are of lower caliber.

As they say back in the holler, you started out dumb and got smarter. The basic-ass undergrad classes are all really f'n similar, actually. As a person who took the CC route, then relived prepharmacy vicariously via a spouse at a larger university, I can assure you that the only difference is the quality of students. Point-by-point the classes were eerily similar. I went to a community college and got a 97-percentile on the ACS O-Chem exam. I was beating kids at much more prestigious schools with that score - and I got Bs in that course because the teacher gave NOBODY in the entire class an A. Add to the equation that I'm an idiot, and it becomes clear than community college courses aren't as subpar as many pretend they are. It isn't community college vs. "big" college, it's just individual classes vs. individual classes.

And if you get a B at an Ivy League school, well, that might not mean anything. They inflate grades like Wimpy eats hamburgers...and that **** is documented, not just random internet chatter.

And for the record, 3.27 GPA for undergrad, 80-something-odd PCAT. 83 or 85. It was so long ago that I don't care to remember it. I got 90s in every category except reading comprehension. It screwed me over...I think I got a 30-something in it.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

I honestly don't think PCAT is a good test of how smart you are or whether you took classes at a CC or a 4 yrs college.
I know a guy in my class with 86 PCAT but he failed all three major classes we took last semester and is currently on one year suspension. Then there is this other girl in my class that made 66 on the PCAT. she won the best student in our pharmaceutics class during summer academy and has been leading almost the whole class in all the classes.
so for some students that english is not their first language or that did not grow up here, they do poorly on the verbal and reading comprehension sections which affect their composite score.

No number is a good indicator of how good of a pharmacist you''ll be. Heck, performance in pharmacy school isn't even that good of an indicator of how good a pharmacist you'll be.

 

[doublehh03]

No number is a good indicator of how good of a pharmacist you''ll be. Heck, performance in pharmacy school isn't even that good of an indicator of how good a pharmacist you'll be.

when you graduate from pharm school, and if u get your license, no one knows your grades.

but again, if you go to a known school, it's easier to get jobs and you're more respected on first impression.

but first impression doesn't last long unless you can back up that

 

[WVUPharm2007]

when you graduate from pharm school, and if u get your license, no one knows your grades.

Some demand a CV, I guess. But, yeah, definitely true.

but again, if you go to a known school, it's easier to get jobs and you're more respected on first impression.

Nobody cares what school you went to in the world of pharmacy unless the person in question also went to that school. Then they get all nostalgic and fuzzy inside. If someone is really awestruck by someone automatically by throwing around a name, I'm not sure I care if they respect me. In fact, I'd rather have people think I'm an idiot at first. That way if I do earn their respect, it will truly mean something.

but first impression doesn't last long unless you can back up that

Ok, this is true....

 

[evilolive]

Nobody cares what school you went to in the world of pharmacy unless the person in question also went to that school.

This is not necessarily true.

And if you get a B at an Ivy League school, well, that might not mean anything. They inflate grades like Wimpy eats hamburgers...and that **** is documented, not just random internet chatter.

Perhaps, but the still are smart and do have to perform at a much higher level than their community college compatriots. Why is it necessary to weed people out when the admissions process has somewhat already done it for you? These aforementioned safeguards are by no means universal.

At the same time, why do you think investment banks recruit exclusively from top schools? The foot in the door really does apply in the corporate world, and to some extent, probably health care as well. There are lots of individuals who don't have the means to get there, but there must be something that drives the seemingly elitist hierachy; I doubt it's just the warm fuzzy feeling of recognizing alumni. The point is that there's a standard. I agree it's not fair that people don't always get recognition from that glass ceiling, but you're rather an exception to the rule. As much as you can point to your own personal experiences, can you not say that there are thousands more that DO fit the stereotypes and would lead one to believe that people draw these conclusions for a reason?

 

[WVUPharm2007]

Perception is the mother of all lies. And, granted, if I had an MBA, it would matter. Thankfully I'm in the pharmacy world where, and trust me on this, nobody cares where you went to school.

The pretentious wankers at Goldman Sachs have little effect on me. Thank God.

 

[evilolive]

Whether or not they affect you is beside the point. Perception is flawed, but there isn't much else to go by with that optimistic viewpoint in the world. Pessimism has its place, especially when it involves $$.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

I'm not even sure what you're talking about anymore. My attention span ran out a few posts ago. But if you're still trying to tell me what school I go to will actually matter ever in my life, I continue to disagree.

 

[KellyBean]

When you get all, you'll all have jobs and will all make about the same.

 

[fmbzp5]

To compare the competitiveness of the business world to the average pharmacy job is not even realistic. The pool of individuals with a business degree to recruit from far outweighs the shortage of pharmacist in the US. Also the amount of those that can complete a business degree is far larger than those in a professional program making an even bigger difference among graduates. Also let's face it, two business people could have totally different ideas where one sinks the company the other makes it prosper. A retail pharmacist is going to take a job and work the same as the other person if they had the job. Their personality, etc may not be the same but their work will.

 

[Caverject]

A number of reasons that I believe to be true:
1) Some people don't test well and never will - especially when it's a broad examination.
2) The classes they took were at a - but not exclusively limited to - community college and were exceptionally easy. If you get an A at some random community college, it won't give nearly anywhere the indicator of academic rigor the way a B at an ivy league college would. You may outperform your peers on the bell curve, but this doesn't necessarily guarantee that the 'best' of this sampling would be able to compete with other more qualified candidates. This is not to say that CCs are bad (there are plenty of CCs that probably DO give better educational quality than a few state schools, but they are rather an exception to the rule), but it's a reality that on average the quality of students in that environment are of lower caliber.
3) People don't retain information for long periods of time. This can be coupled with 2) as the courses that don't stress you won't teach you the material necessary to take the exam. The PCAT is not difficult because it does not testing critical thinking; it is mostly a memorization/recall assessment.
4) Bad test day. Sometimes you don't get enough sleep or something happens and you screw up. **** happens. I myself got woken up in the middle of my slumber the night before the PCAT and went in with only 5 hours of broken sleep.
5) People don't necessarily know how to study for the exams.

While this may seem like a cruel and pessimistic analysis, I do believe each one of my ideas has its own merits. It's not a fair world, and some people are more capable than others. The PCAT is but one indicator of readiness for pharmacy, and those who can jump through the hoops will be better off in becoming a pharmacist. On the other hand, testing well on the PCAT won't guarantee competency as a good pharmacist, but it's better than no set bar at all. That's why the PCAT isn't the only determining factor in admissions. Just my two cents.

Bottom line you are worthless if you go to community college. I did all my undergrad at community college and graduated with a 2.9 gpa and got a 99 on my PCAT. Yep, It's clearly obvious I got nothing out of community college.

 

[howsoonisnow]

Perhaps, but the still are smart and do have to perform at a much higher level than their community college compatriots. Why is it necessary to weed people out when the admissions process has somewhat already done it for you? These aforementioned safeguards are by no means universal.

At the same time, why do you think investment banks recruit exclusively from top schools? The foot in the door really does apply in the corporate world, and to some extent, probably health care as well. There are lots of individuals who don't have the means to get there, but there must be something that drives the seemingly elitist hierachy; I doubt it's just the warm fuzzy feeling of recognizing alumni. The point is that there's a standard. I agree it's not fair that people don't always get recognition from that glass ceiling, but you're rather an exception to the rule. As much as you can point to your own personal experiences, can you not say that there are thousands more that DO fit the stereotypes and would lead one to believe that people draw these conclusions for a reason?

First, I may be wrong, but I'm assuming you took or are taking you're prereqs at a school that garners a bit of prestige.
If that is the case how is it that you've managed to dodge the "good ol boys" bullet for this long? Look around you! ANYONE with enough money can get their children into ANY SCHOOL they wish him/her to attend.
Have an unusally tall child with great hand/eye coordination? Instant full scholarship at the school of your choice. Just maintain a C average and play on our basketball team.
You've created an equation: Ivy League=intelligent/gifted
That equation, my friend, is flawed.
When I look up I see the sky, not your ridiculous imposed glass ceiling.
And when you look down, it isn't me you're seeing. It's your own reflection. The Ivy Leauge Narcissus. And what a beautiful image. Keep staring.